Étienne Balibar

Note R. Dumain's blog entry written on 15 October 2006:

Though it now reflects to some extent an earlier time, and to a larger extent
particularly French conditions, and most irritatingly, the connection to Althusser
and Communist politics, this article is quite rich and profound, and its ideological
analysis remains pertinent, especially now to (Anglo-)American ideological
conditions. (Consider the limitations of the likes of Sam Harris, Dawkins,
E. O. Wilson, Dennett, etc.) Much of Balibar's critique of rationalism is
geared to the specifically French intellectual heritage (from Descartes on
down), but it applies, with a few tweaks more generally, and quite pointedly,
to the highly restricted intellectual discourse of the United States.

There is one passage, though, which is rather startling (though redolent
of Marcusewhom Balibar dismisses [along
with the Frankfurt School] as an irrationalistand reminiscent of András
Gedö), to the effect that positivism is the main philosophical enemy,
because it also the basis of its irrationalist nemesis. Positivism has been
largely displaced by irrationalism in the United States (the article was written
in the 1970s, with an eye to French conditions), but when one looks at the
ideologues of the scientific community, one can see that its feeble defense
of scientific rationality while yielding concessions to religion as long as
it doesn't interfere with the scientific establishment (e.g. the American
Association for the Advancement of Science), is predicated on narrow positivist
(or its inverse, Popperian) grounds.